Zach Aaronson
Spring Semester 2011
“Translations”
Brian Friel’s “Translations” was first performed on September 23rd, 1980 at the Guildhall
in Northern Ireland (UK). The performance was well received by audiences and critics alike for
its eloquent social commentaries and comical personalities. With “Translations” Friel seeks to
recreate the great spirited plays of Lady Gregorys, W.B. Yeats and J.M. Synge for the modern
audience. While the play is set during the 1800’s, its messages are universal, thus relevant for its
presentation in the twenty first century. Friel addresses topics such as Irish-British relations, the
use of language in cultures and the failures that often result when people attempt to communicate
with each other. The protagonist is Owen and his transformation through the course of events
serves to comment on language’s influence on greater social struggles is the most important
aspect of the play.
The play begins with Manus teaching Sarah to speak. This is an immediate indicator that
the play concerns itself with language. Manus is described as “in his late twenties/thirties…He is
pale-faced, lightly built, intense and works as an unpaid assistant-a monitor- to his father” (256).
Sarah is unable to speak and consequently results to speaking with her physical movements and
grunts. Manus does get her to say “My name is…” eventually (Friel 257). The focus switches
then to the main protagonist, Owen.
Owen is Manus’s brother and after six years of living in Dublin, he is returning to his
home Ballybeg. His father, Hugh, is an alcoholic schoolmaster. He is with two other men,
Captain Lancey and Lieutenant Yolland. The three are making a map of Ireland; Owens serves
as a translator, translating Irish signs and places. This is a direct historical reference to the
Ordnance Survey, which was a government initiative to create a map of Ireland in its entirety
(Friel 552). His position as translator serves to assist in assimilating the Irish into English
culture. For example, Yolland and Owen approach many of the local stores in Ballybeg. Owen
states, “We are trying to denominate and at the same time describe that tiny area of soggy, rocky,
sandy round where that little stream enters the sea, an area known locally as Bun na
hAbhann…Burnfoot! What about Burnfoot” (Friel 279). In this aspect, Owen serves as to
propagate Ballybeg through the use of controlling language.
Yolland, Owen’s partner, is conflicted about changing the names of these places. He
feels that their jobs are serving to destroy the culturally significant Irish dialect. He has seen the
beauty of Ireland and fears his work is serving to destroy it. Commenting about Ireland to
Manus and Owen, Yolland says, “But certain tasks demand their own tempo. You cannot
rename a whole country overnight. Your Irish air has made me bold” (Friel 279). His love affair
with Ireland increases as Owen takes him around the town renaming landmarks.
Owen eventually introduces Yolland to Maire. Maire is a local who Manus is hoping to
court. However, it is soon realized that Maire and Yolland have feelings for each other. They
kiss onstage. Eventually Manus finds out about this affair and goes to defend his honor against
Yolland. Despite his anger, he does not end up attacking Yolland. Again, language plays a key
role in this relationship because Yolland only speaks English and Maire speaks only Irish.
The next night, Yolland goes missing. Manus fears that Yolland’s disappearance will
indict him as the main suspect so he decides to flee town. It is not clear why Yolland suddenly
left Ballybeg. It is alluded that Yolland’s disappearance was either due to him being attacked or
he became a full member of an Irish armed resistance. Maire is unable to accept Yolland’s
disappearance even as British soldiers form a search party. The British are presented as very
hostile and unsympathetic as they threaten to shoot the village’s livestock if Yolland were not
returned: “If by then the lieutenant hasn’t been found, we will proceed until a complete clearance
is made of this entire section” (Friel 302). It is because of this malicious treatment of the Irish
civilians by the British soldiers that leads Owen to an epiphany: he too must join the Irish
resistance.
Manus’s decision to leave town is an interesting point of conflict. Manus’s decision to
leave is motivated by the new relationship between Yolland and Maire. He is heartbroken, but
realizes that if the authorities ever found him, they would arrest him. This is yet another
example of the British not making any effort into creating stable relations with the Irish.
Ignorance is most associated with the British in this play because they quickly jump to judgment
as to whether Yolland was murdered by Manus. Manus cannot trust that the British would not
arrest him, though he had nothing to do with Yolland’s mysterious disappearance. Manus fears
that if he were found, the British would take his heartbroken emotions as a sign of guilt for
murdering Yolland. In thinking so, he does not believe that the British would show any empathy
toward his situation even though heartbreak is a universal emotion.
According to the views of Yolland and Owen (after he joins the revolution), culture is
dependent on its evocation through language. As they were going around Ballybeg renaming the
landmarks, Yolland felt guilty for his actions. In act one, scene one, Yolland and Owen are
getting drunk together. It is here that Yolland’s fascination with the Irish language is revealed.
Yolland is trying to pronounce various Irish words and asking Owen if he said them correctly.
Yolland states, “And bloody marvelous stuff it is, too! I love it! Bloody, bloody, bloody
marvelous!” (291). As the play progresses Yolland’s love affair with the Irish language soon
becomes replaced with anger toward the British for destroying that language. It is in this
instance that Yolland actually contradicts himself. He sees language being a significant factor in
establishing culture. However, his relationship with Maire exists, despite their lack of
communication. Basically they communicate using their bodies since they do not share the same
languages. Yet, their relationship clearly shows that language has no bearing on culture because
they have these intimate feelings for each other without communicating.
The drunkard Hugh who is ironically one of the more logical and informative of the
characters, comments on this notion. As Owen is gathering his things to leave, Hugh attempts to
persuade him to stay stating, “Three thoughts occur to me: A- that is not the literal past, the
‘facts’ of history, that shape us, but images of the past embodied in language…B- we must never
cease renewing those images; because once we do, we fossilize” (Friel 306). Here, Hugh is
going against the notions that culture is dependent on preserving its language. Hugh believes
that to be too caught up with the naming of things can hold communities back. By keeping the
names the same, Hugh claims that the culture would “fossilize,” becoming irrelevant to modern
times. Therefore, Hugh presents another argument claiming that language should not and does
not influence culture. If one becomes too caught up in language and what things are referred to
as, they stand to lose sight of the more important tenants of the culture itself.
The reliability of memory is also critical in understanding this culturally significant piece
of art. Most of the commentary on memory comes toward the end of the play and is revealed
through the character of Hugh. Hugh is the drunken father of Owen and Manus and owns a local
tavern in Ballybeg. Hugh represents the older Irish generation, one who has lived his entire life
in Ballybeg while the signs were still in Irish. Before Owen leaves to join the revolution, Hugh
parts with him some dramatic words: “Take care, Owen. To remember everything is a form of
madness” (Friel 307). Here, Hugh is explaining that to get caught up with language works to
deteriorate the important features of Irish. In fact, Hugh is going as far to say that language is
not indictive of the cultural norms. Therefore, he sees the actions of the British soldiers not an
affective attempt to culturally imperialize the Irish. Since memory is unreliable, lingering on it
would not be beneficial since “to remember everything is a form of madness.” Cultures evolve
and clearly Irish culture is being put in a position where it is forced to adapt to the changes that
are taking place. Hugh calls for embracing these changes because hanging onto cultural norms
can equally devastate the community as the name changes do. The refusal of the Irish to accept
the new cultural norms blinds them from recognizing the true aspects of their culture, which is
grounded in family relations. The act of Owen leaving Ballybeg Hugh deems as more harmful to
his culture since he is abandoning the family structure in a desperate act to preserve what he feels
is Irish culture.
Friel’s strength as a playwright derives from his ability to recreate an authentic Irish play,
similar to those performed during the early twentieth century for a modern audience.
“Translations” adheres to the thematic structures associated with Irish literature and embraces the
dialect of the Irish people. This attempt to recreate the typical Irish play creates a tension that
works against his prose. With “Translations,” Friel emphasizes the importance of language, but
negates that its ever changing nature truly affects culture. However, Friel is clearly using
language as a means of portraying the culture. The fact that the British pronounce Owen’s name
incorrectly demonstrates that the two cultures are incapable with each other. This makes the
ending seem ambiguous because Hugh’s final words to Owen urge him not to desert his
hometown.
The works of Brain Friel and Lady Gregory, another Irish playwright, interlock comedy
and a play on language in order to assert broader political themes. When she originally wrote
“Spreading the News,” Lady Gregory intended the play to be tragic. She wrote, “The idea of this
play first came to me as a tragedy. I kept seeing as in a picture people sitting by the roadside,
and a girl passing to the market, gay and fearless. And then I saw her passing by the same place
at evening, her head hanging, the heads of others turned from her…” (Friel 443). However, she
eventually wrote her play as a comedy in order to reach a larger audience and to distance herself
from “the high poetic work” of Yeats and Synge. This demonstrates her play as dependent on
entertaining the audience, an ambitious goal met. One could argue that the embrace of comedy
undermines her larger commentary. Despite this notion, her work is not weakened by her use of
comedy in a similar fashion found with “The Rising of the Moon.” In fact, it enriches the text’s
credibility with its ability to make history as entertaining as it is vital to understanding the events
that led to how Irish culture was affected by British imperialism.
Friel takes a similar approach in binding comedic scenarios with pertinent social issues.
Each of his characters are outrageous in their own right, yet each serves as a greater
representation of the classes of Irish. He does so however at the expense of historical accuracy.
Friel comments on his historical inaccuracies as being irrelevant to the play’s deeper significance
in an essay he wrote concerning “Translations”: “Writing an historical play may bestow certain
advantages but it also imposes particular responsibilities. The apparent advantages are the
established historical facts…The concomitant responsibility is to acknowledge those facts or
ideas, but not to defer to them. Drama is first a fiction, with the authority of fiction. You don’t
go to “Macbeth” for history” (Friel 546). The actual person, Yolland, Friel attempts to portray
did not join the survey department until 1838, despite the fact that the play takes place in 1833.
However, “Translations” continues to be an informative artwork despite its historical
inaccuracies. This is because the emotions associated with Irish-British relations and the clashes
of cultural norms are universal. Along with Friel’s “Translations,” Lady Gregory’s “Spreading
the News” also deals with themes of language and preserving culture. Both plays also end with
ambiguous results, a common feature recognized in Irish literature.
“Translations” is a fantastic example of Irish drama. Though it is written many years
after writers such as Yeats and Lady Gregory dominated the scene it remains an aesthetically and
socially pleasant play. Arguably, Friel’s most important strength is his ability to recreate the
revolutionary Irish play. He does at a time where Irish-British relations are at their best, yet is
still able to make a play that is relevant and befitting for the younger generations. Friel also
relies on character development as a key component to understanding the messages he puts
forward. Though the messages are ambiguous in their argument, they still serve a purpose of
revealing certain issues in society. The misconceptions of memory and language as an indicator
of culture also work to strengthen the play’s messages. Language has always been a topic of
much interest in the Irish. “Translations” reflects the often difficult opinions the Irish had of the
British as they changed the names of their culturally affected places.
Bibliography